Jump to content

Cost of insurance


AZAV8OR

Recommended Posts

Kevin,

Off topic, but I had a SR 20 and I'm looking at the FD. Can you please elaborate on the significant cost reduction in flying. You can either PM me, or start another topic, as I'm very interested.

 

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

As another insurance data point, I just renewed mine.  Last year with about 10hrs in type I was at $1414.  This year with 70hrs in type and no claims I paid $1285.

 

At least it's going slowly in the right direction.   :)

 

EDIT:  This is a policy through USAIG brokered through AIM and Chris Wolbert, $75k hull value and full coverage with $1M limits, with $0 deductible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I am working on becoming a GA to FD convert, and my first insurance quote was approx. $1800 to 2000/year.

 

One hang-up was the question: "how much time in the CT ?".  When checkout training is complete, the answer to

 

that won't be too much time; therefore insurance premium will remain high for a while: guess I'll have to fly every

 

day for the first year.  Previously, an insurance agent suggested a bias against BRS/CAPS aircraft; i.e. the hull

 

would be totaled following chute deployment.  I'm thinking that we need more research on the subject.

 

In my excellent dollar(demo) ride with "Coppercity" recently, my impression is that a chute landing would result

 

in minimal damage.

 

 

RH/SEZ

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A handful of Cirrus aircraft have been repaired after CAPS/BRS pulls and are flying again.

 

Not sure if the same is possible with a CT under favorable conditions or not.

 

But I think it's best to think of the BRS as a survival tool. When surviving an incident comes into any doubt at all, insurance claims and repairability really should not enter into the decision process. Just make sure YOU survive to fly another day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the fellow who taught the composite class I took on the CT there have been CT's repaired after a chute deployment, but there was considerable damage. You also have to consider how the insurance company decides if the airplane is totaled. It is a balance between cost of repair and salvage value of the aircraft.

 

The other thing to consider in how much damage there will be. The chute deployment doesn't just pop the little panel out, it rips through the roof of the aircraft. The landing will likely ruin at minimum the motor mount and firewall, the main gear and gear box area. This damage alone will put the cost of repairs along with salvage value over the total value of the airplane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing to consider in how much damage there will be. The chute deployment doesn't just pop the little panel out, it rips through the roof of the aircraft. The landing will likely ruin at minimum the motor mount and firewall, the main gear and gear box area. This damage alone will put the cost of repairs along with salvage value over the total value of the airplane.

Again, agree to disagree.

 

I don't care a whit what happens to the plane. Screw it.

 

Lots of pilots have died trying to save planes.

 

For me, I'll go with the option that gives me the best chance of survival.

 

Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is about the cost of insurance, not whether to pull the chute or not.

 

Well, some are finding a link between insurance rates and hull damage and even asserting that would affect their decision to pull.

 

Hence, I think there's enough of a connection to be relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3-4 I believe. You can find out for sure on the BRS website

 

I counted three on the BRS site.  

 

1) VFR into IMC, chute pulled at 6000'

 

2) Go around gone bad in Morocco, chute pulled at 60' 

 

3) Flight Design test pilot testing for Vne+ flutter had a wing failure at 195mph (~170kt).  Pulled the chute far above deployment speed at 1200' and it worked.

 

As far as I can tell, and assuming these are the only incidents of BRS deployment for CTs, all persons survived without significant injury.  That's an outstanding record in a wide range of conditions.  Note that two of the three were outside the documented deployment envelope in speed or altitude, and yet were still successful.  This is pretty good data promoting the effectiveness of the CT BRS system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am working on becoming a GA to FD convert, and my first insurance quote was approx. $1800 to 2000/year.

 

One hang-up was the question: "how much time in the CT ?".  When checkout training is complete, the answer to

 

that won't be too much time; therefore insurance premium will remain high for a while: guess I'll have to fly every

 

day for the first year.  Previously, an insurance agent suggested a bias against BRS/CAPS aircraft; i.e. the hull

 

would be totaled following chute deployment.  I'm thinking that we need more research on the subject.

 

In my excellent dollar(demo) ride with "Coppercity" recently, my impression is that a chute landing would result

 

in minimal damage.

 

 

RH/SEZ

 

Correct.  Insurance companies do not give a break for the BRS because they believe that once the chute is pulled the aircraft will be totaled. The insurance is for the plane, not for the people.  cynical huh?

 

Hull value is the 99% cost driver for the insurance on any plane, and is also true for the CT.  The fixed gear on the CT also make it little cheaper.  insurance companies know that half of all accidents they pay out on are due to retractable gear issues..

 

There is a small formula for all aircraft in regard to time in the air.  Also, if two pilots in the plane, they take the pilot with the fewest hours as their basis.  To get a significant break on hours we are told it would require someone with 1000 hours or more, and hundreds in the CT.  Otherwise, its a small savings.

 

In general, for a new CT with a hull value of $150k plus, it's around $2500/yr. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, agree to disagree.

 

I don't care a whit what happens to the plane. Screw it.

 

Lots of pilots have died trying to save planes.

 

For me, I'll go with the option that gives me the best chance of survival.

 

Period.

 

You are disagreeing with a point that I am not making by taking what I posted out of context. I have never implied that cost should ever be a consideration in using the chute. When I posted I didn't realize this was an old thread. I was simply replying to post #28 by rhanson which showed up at the top of the page.

My reply to him was about the fact that there is more than minimal damage when you pull the chute, and how the insurance company decides if the airplane is totaled.

 

I am in no way implying the cost of repairs or any other factors other than saving the occupants of the aircraft be considered in pulling the chute handle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, agree to disagree.

 

I don't care a whit what happens to the plane. Screw it.

 

Lots of pilots have died trying to save planes.

 

For me, I'll go with the option that gives me the best chance of survival.

 

Period.

Like I've said for years, I consider the throttle to be the ownership transfer lever: at idle. I own it, anything forward, the insurance company does!

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I counted three on the BRS site.  

 

1) VFR into IMC, chute pulled at 6000'

 

2) Go around gone bad in Morocco, chute pulled at 60' 

 

3) Flight Design test pilot testing for Vne+ flutter had a wing failure at 195mph (~170kt).  Pulled the chute far above deployment speed at 1200' and it worked.

 

As far as I can tell, and assuming these are the only incidents of BRS deployment for CTs, all persons survived without significant injury.  That's an outstanding record in a wide range of conditions.  Note that two of the three were outside the documented deployment envelope in speed or altitude, and yet were still successful.  This is pretty good data promoting the effectiveness of the CT BRS system.

Is that a typo, or do you really mean sixty feet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's spelt 'Benny' - British name, even more British humour.  (Do you watch that stuff in America?!)

 

Benny Hill was a staple for me as a teenager, I used to watch it with my dad nightly.  Fun stuff.

 

BTW, BRS lists the 60' incident as a "save" so the pilot must have made it okay.  Unknown if the chute had time to deploy fully or just acted as a speed brake to lessen impact energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...